The Project Management Group, Inc., B-284455, April 14, 2000

B-284455 Apr 14, 2000 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Evaluation of offeror's corporate experience which gives firm only limited credit for experience of its key personnel with other entities is unobjectionable where evaluation was performed in accordance with stated evaluation criteria and reflects a reasonable assessment of offeror's experience. PMG contends that the award was improper because the agency improperly downgraded PMG for its lack of corporate experience. Contemplated the award of a 1-year contract with two 1-year renewal options to the responsible offeror whose conforming offer was most advantageous to the government. The RFP stated as follows: Proposals will be considered only from offerors who are regularly established in the business called for and who are financially responsible and have the necessary personnel to furnish services in the volume required for items under this contract. View Decision Matter of: The Project Management Group, Inc. File: B-284455 Date: April 14, 2000 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION The Project Management Group, Inc. (PMG) protests the award of a contract to RS Staffing, Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. 766-9-99, issued as a total small business set-aside by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for the provision of pharmacy technicians and mail/packaging support for a VA outpatient pharmacy in Charleston, South Carolina. PMG contends that the award was improper because the agency improperly downgraded PMG for its lack of corporate experience. We deny the protest. The RFP, issued on November 1, 1999 as a commercial acquisition under the special procedures in Part 12 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, contemplated the award of a 1-year contract with two 1-year renewal options to the responsible offeror whose conforming offer was most advantageous to the government. RFP at 3, 17. The RFP listed the following four technical evaluation factors, indicating that when combined, their weight would be equal to that of price in the overall evaluation: corporate experience and demonstrated capabilities; personnel qualifications; technical approach to the statement of work; and past performance. RFP at 17. It also cautioned that the offeror that submitted the lowest price would not necessarily be awarded the contract. RFP at 18. With respect to corporate experience and demonstrated capabilities, the RFP stated as follows: Proposals will be considered only from offerors who are regularly established in the business called for and who are financially responsible and have the necessary personnel to furnish services in the volume required for items under this contract. Those offerors having at leas[t] two years experience with similar type contracts (with references) will receive full points. Those offerors with less than two years experience will receive a lesser amount in proportion to their experience. RFP at 17. With respect to past performance, the RFP provided that the evaluation would be performed on the basis of "[s]imilar contracts held by the contractor with government and industry in the previous 12 months, to include references." Id. Eleven small business concerns, including PMG, submitted proposals by the December 1 closing date. An evaluation panel reviewed and scored the proposals, using a 100-point scale under which 49 points were allocated to the technical evaluation and 51 points to price. The technical evaluation factors were weighted as follows: corporate experience and demonstrated capabilities, 17 points; personnel qualifications, 10 points; technical approach, 17 points; and past performance, 5 points. Agency Report, Tab D, Evaluation Documents, at 1-6. PMG describes itself in its proposal as "a project management firm that employs for the duration of a project," and states that it has one full-time employee and three part-time employees. PMG Proposal at 11. It states that "[a]n experienced team consisting of a health care administrator and a registered pharmac[ist], each with over 20 years of experience in their chosen fields will provide project oversight." Id. at 10. The proposal provides that "the majority of the principals' experience occurred while performing military duty, and the points-of-contact, though provided, are not currently with the organization." Id. at 11. The proposal states that PMG was formed in October 1997, id., app. C at 1, and does not specifically identify any contracts that the firm has performed. PMG's technical proposal was ranked 10th of the 11, and received a point score of 23.66. Because PMG's price of $3,723,287.26 for the base year and all options was the lowest offered, it received the highest possible point score of 51 points. The two scores combined produced an overall score of 74.66, which placed it 5th among the 11 offers.